1. Does the Eighth's Circuit ruling that images of a minor dressing and using the toilet constitute "lascivious exhibition" in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a) and 2256(2)(A)(v) conflict with the D.C. Circuit's decision in United States v. Hillie and a plain and ordinary reading of the statutory definition?

2. Does the Eighth Circuit's reliance on the Dost factors to define "lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area" under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2251(a) and 2256 conflict with the D.C. Circuit's decision in United States v. Hillie, which rejects using the Dost factors?

3. Is a defendant that challenges the legal definition of what constitutes "lascivious exhibition" but does not dispute the facts at trial entitled to a two level reduction for acceptance of responsibility?

Question not identified.